PLUM CREEK CONSERVATION DISTRICT. Groundwater Management Plan. Adopted as Amended Approved by the TWDB on December 18, 2017

Transcription

1 PLUM CREEK CONSERVATION DISTRICT Groundwater Management Plan Adopted as Amended Approved by the TWDB on December 18, 2017

2 PLUM CREEK CONSERVATION DISTRICT P.O. Box 328 Lockhart, Texas Phone: 512 / Fax: 512 / info@pccd.org Website: President: James A. Holt, Jr.; Vice-President: James O. Lipscomb; Directors: Lucy Knight, Ben Twidwell, Fred Rothert, Peter Reinecke Adopted, Groundwater Management Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. DISTRICT MISSION 2. TIME PERIOD OF THIS PLAN 3. BACKGROUND 1. Introduction 2. Policy 3. Governing Board 4. Daily Operations 5. Topography 6. Location and Extent 7. Water Resources 4. GROUNDWATER RESOURCES 5. MANAGEMENT ZONES 6. PRODUCTION AND SPACING OF WELLS 7. MANAGEMENT OF GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES 8. ACTIONS, PROCEDURES, PERFORMANCE AND PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 9. METHODOLOGY FOR TRACKING DISTRICT PROGRESS IN ACHIEVING MANAGEMENT GOALS 10. MANAGEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, & PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

3 10.1 Efficient Use of Groundwater 10.2 Controlling and Preventing Waste of Groundwater 10.3 Control and Prevent Subsidence 10.4 Conjunctive Use of Surface and Groundwater 10.5 Develop a Management Strategy to Address Drought Conditions 10.6 Address Natural Resource Issues That Impact the Use and Availability of Groundwater and Which are Impacted By the Use of Groundwater 10.7 Conservation of Groundwater including Recharge Enhancement, Rainwater Harvesting, Brush Control, and/or Precipitation Enhancement of Groundwater Resources in the District 10.8 Mitigation & Desired Future Conditions of Groundwater Resources 10.9 Desired Future Conditions of Groundwater Resources Alternative Supply 11. PROJECTED TOTAL DEMAND FOR WATER WITHIN THE DISTRICT 12. PROJECTED SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES WITHIN THE DISTRICT 13. WATER NEEDS WITHIN THE DISTRICT 14. WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES WITHIN THE DISTRICT 15. AMOUNT OF GROUNDWATER BEING USED IN THE DISTRICT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS 16. ANNUAL AMOUNT OF RECHARGE FROM PRECIPITATION TO THE GROUNDWATER RESOURCES WITHIN THE DISTRICT. 17. ANNUAL VOLUME OF WATER THAT DISCHARGES FROM THE AQUIFER TO SPRINGS AND SURFACE WATER BODIES. 18. ESTIMATE OF THE ANNUAL VOLUME OF FLOW INTO THE DISTRICT, OUT OF THE DISTRICT, AND BETWEEN AQUIFERS IN THE DISTRICT. 19. ESTIMATE OF MODELED AVAILABLE GROUNDWATER IN DISTRICT BASED ON DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS. 20. GEOLOGY MAP OF PCCD

4 PLUM CREEK CONSERVATION DISTRICT GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 1. DISTRICT MISSION The Plum Creek Conservation District (PCCD) mission for groundwater management is to conserve and preserve groundwater availability and protect permitted and exempt groundwater users, by gathering information about groundwater conditions and uses within the District; obtaining information from surrounding Groundwater Districts to assist in understanding groundwater availability within Plum Creek s area; by using that information to adopt Rules consistent with state law in order to maximize the beneficial development and use of the groundwater resources on a sustainable basis in keeping with the desired future conditions of aquifers within Plum Creek Conservation District s jurisdictional area; and by then enforcing these adopted Rules. The District will accomplish this mission by identifying aquifers within the District; and then by (1) determining zones of the various aquifers within the District, (2) imposing spacing requirements, (3) limiting production, (4) requiring permits for non-exempt wells and groundwater production, (5) noting information on exempt wells, (6) establishing water drawdown levels, (7) monitoring aquifer levels and production, (8) making appropriate adjustments to allowable and permitted production as more data become available, and (9) encouraging conservation to limit pumping. These actions are designed to extend the quantity and preserve the quality of the water available in the aquifers in Caldwell and Hays counties regulated by the District. PCCD is committed to protecting, conserving, and preventing waste of the groundwater resources in its District for the benefit of the citizens, economy and environment. 2. TIME PERIOD OF THIS PLAN This plan will become effective upon adoption by the PCCD Board of Directors and approval as administratively complete by the Texas Water Development Board. The plan will remain in effect for five (5) years after the date of approval or until a revised plan is adopted and approved, or as otherwise directed by the Texas Legislature. 1

5 3. BACKGROUND The PCCD is situated in parts of Caldwell and Hays Counties. The District was created as a Water Control and Improvement District in the 55 th Texas Regular Legislative Session in 1957 with the passage of Senate Bill 289 under the provisions of Section 59, Article XVI of the Texas Constitution. The enabling statute provided the District with the power to control, conserve, protect, distribute and utilize the storm and floodwaters and unappropriated flow of Plum Creek and its tributaries as a Water Control and Improvement District. In 1989 the original 1957 legislation was amended to additionally authorize the District, upon approval of the qualified voters of the District, to exercise the powers and duties imposed under what is now Chapter 36 of the Texas Water Code, for the preservation, conservation, protection, recharge, and prevention of waste and pollution of the underground water of the District except in those areas of the District that were part of the Barton Springs-Edwards Aquifer Conservation District or the Edwards Underground Water District on January 1, The voters in the District approved the implementation of the powers granted by the Legislature after the 1989 amendment was passed in the Legislature. 1. Introduction: The District recognizes that the groundwater resources of the region are of vital importance not only within the District but to areas outside the District. The District was created, in part, to conserve, preserve, protect, and prevent waste of all of the water resources within its jurisdiction. The District believes that the groundwater resources in the District can be managed in a prudent and cost effective manner through education and conservation, coupled with reasonable regulation, including permitting of new and existing non-exempt wells and registering of exempt wells. Although the District has undertaken studies and has developed information about the occurrence and quality of groundwater in various geologic formations in and near the District, the District continues to conclude that one of the greatest threats to prevent the District from achieving the stated mission are inadequate information about groundwater occurrence, quality, groundwater production volumes, groundwater production rates, groundwater movement and groundwater uses within and from aquifers regulated by the District based in part on a lack of knowledge about groundwater production from exempt wells both within the District and groundwater occurrence and production from all aquifers in areas without groundwater districts adjacent to or in close proximity with the area of Plum Creek Conservation District. The District has concerns about the potential for groundwater quality degradation in some areas of the District related to existing groundwater pumping and to old oil and gas activities. The District continually needs to develop more information to understand how groundwater production, recharge, and flow into and out of the District are interrelated with 2

6 production, recharge and flow in areas surrounding the District. Basic knowledge of the aquifers and their hydrogeological properties, a quantification of resources, and development of data on groundwater quality are the foundation from which to build prudent planning measures. This Management Plan is intended as a tool to focus the thoughts and actions of those given the responsibility for the execution of the District s activities in developing information and in driving activities implementing the District s goals. 2. Policy: It shall be the policy of the Board of Directors that the most beneficial use of groundwater in the District is to maintain present non-wasteful groundwater uses of those in the District and then to provide for future groundwater needs of citizens. Groundwater shall be beneficially used, conserved, preserved, protected, and waste prevented within the District to maintain the viability of those resources for current users and for users in the future who are in the District s area., The Board of Directors, with the cooperation of the citizens of the District and of surrounding political subdivisions, shall implement this management plan and any necessary modifications thereof to achieve this goal. 3. Governing Board: The District is governed by an appointed six member Board of Directors. 4. Daily Operations: The day-to-day management of District activities is carried out currently by a three- member staff led by Johnie Halliburton, Executive Manager and Daniel Meyer, Assistant Manager. 5. Topography: The land surface of Caldwell County ranges from nearly flat to hilly. The minimum elevation, about 295 feet, is at the southern tip of the County where Plum Creek joins the San Marcos River. The maximum elevation in Caldwell County, about 725 feet, is in the area of the so-called Iron Mountains peaks, approximately 2.5 miles southeast of McMahan, a small community approximately 9 miles southeast of Lockhart. Regionally, the topographic elevations increase from southeast to northwest. The portion of District located in Hays County generally exhibits the same type of terrain, although the elevation differences are more pronounced. Some of the surface of the District s area extends into Hays County, which overlies the Balcones Escarpment, and provides drainage to a portion of Plum Creek. 3

7 Plum Creek drains about 310 square miles, or about 60% of Caldwell County. In addition, a portion of Hays County that is drained by Plum Creek is also in the boundaries of the District. There is a small area of Travis County that drains into Plum Creek but that area is not within the District s boundaries. 6. Location and Extent: The District is situated within parts of Caldwell and Hays Counties, but the District s boundaries are not conterminous with those of either Caldwell or Hays Counties. The original boundaries of the District are described in Section 3 of the enabling statute that first created the District. In 2008 there were additional properties located in the southeastern portion of Caldwell County annexed into PCCD at the request of the landowners of the properties, however; the area where those properties were located was also annexed into the Gonzales County Underground Water Conservation District. S.B 1225 of the 82 nd legislature enacted in 2011 was passed to and allowed the property owners annexed by Plum Creek to choose which district they wanted to belong to with the result that the original boundaries of the District were expanded by approximately 4672 acres. The most downstream point of the boundaries of the District is in the most southerly southeast corner of Caldwell County near the confluence of Plum Creek and the San Marcos River. The calls in the original description of the boundaries of Plum Creek Conservation District are, generally, along tract or survey lines. 7. Water Resources: The District does not hold, own or otherwise control any groundwater or surface water rights. The District is located within the territory of the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority ( GBRA ), which controls substantial surface water rights associated with GBRA owned or operated facilities and reservoirs, including Canyon Lake. Some water supply corporations providing retail water service within the District have access to surface water supplies either through direct ownership, through lease, or through long term supply contracts. Most of the permitted surface water rights in the vicinity of Plum Creek Conservation District are from the San Marcos River, which is not in the Boundaries of the District. There are few surface water rights permits for diversions from Plum Creek and none known for diversion from Plum Creek for any purpose other than agricultural use. As a part of this Plan, each year the District will confer at least once with GBRA on cooperative opportunities for conjunctive resource management between ground and surface water suppliers to retail providers and other users. 4. GROUNDWATER RESOURCES 4

8 The PCCD has within its surface area boundaries the following geological formations: Quaternary Alluvium, Leona Gravel, Austin-Pecan Gap, Navarro, Midway, Wilcox Group, Queen City, Reklaw, Saline Edwards, Trinity Group and the Carrizo Sands. A geologic map of the area of the District is appended as Appendix C. The Texas Water Development Board recently ran a groundwater availability model for the Southern portions of the Carrizo-Wilcox, Queen City, and Sparta, aquifers within the District. No information on discharges from, exchanges among aquifers, or flow into or out of the Leona Gravel, or from recent alluvium deposits in the District is currently available from the Texas Water Development Board. The full modeling report, GAM Run Plum Creek Conservation District Management Plan, is appended to this Plan as Appendix B. 5. MANAGEMENT ZONES 1. Alluvium occurs along present day streams and rivers. Consists of sand, silt and clay. Serves as a limited household and livestock aquifer within the predominant sand facies. 2. Leona occurs along scattered outcrops perpendicular to the Balcones Fault System and the IH-35 corridor. Serves as a shallow limited aquifer utilized manly as a small lot irrigation aquifer. Cotton and grain farming has polluted much of the aquifer with nitrates, which are not recommended for human or livestock consumption. 3. Weches is primarily a glauconitic marine clay and is seldom utilized as stray sand or silt aquifer. 4. Queen City occurs as a shallow limited sand and silt aquifer with lesser amounts of clay. The completed wells are generally utilized for household and livestock. 5. Reklaw primarily consists of clay with broken silt and sand intervals that can serve as shallow household and livestock aquifers in limited areas. 6. Carrizo occurs as a major irrigation and municipal aquifer. Consists of ancient barrier island loose finecoarse sand bodies separated by thin estuary silty clays. It is the major aquifer along the Upper Gulf Coastal Plain across southern Texas capable of high production rates of fresh water. 7. Wilcox often studied and associated with the overlying Carrizo aquifer. It is separated from the Carrizo by a regional disconformity and exhibits some very different deltaic facies as compared to the Carrizo. It is utilized as a household, livestock and municipal source of fresh water over a wide area. 8. Midway occurs primarily as a thick clay with minor amounts of silt near the top of the unit. It does not generally serve as a reliable aquifer, even in limited silty zones. 5

9 9. Navarro consists mainly as a thick sequence of expansive clay. It does not serve as an aquifer within the boundaries of the Plum Creek District. 10. Pecan Gap this limestone and chalk unit does serve as a very limited household and livestock fractured low yield aquifer along and parallel to the southeast side of the IH-35 corridor. Many of the wells eventually go dry. 11. Austin Chalk this very limited limestone and chalk aquifer immediately underlies the Pecan Gap and exhibits similar characteristics. 12. Eagle Ford this unit is a petroliferous thin clay and does not serve as an aquifer. 13. Buda occurs as a dense limestone unit in the PCCD area and does not serve as any known aquifer. It does serve as an aquifer in the Uvalde County area. 14. Del Rio does not serve as an aquifer in Texas. It occurs a weathered volcanic ash expansive clay. 15. Georgetown occurs a dense limestone and is not expected to serve as a brackish or saline aquifer in the PCCD area. 16. Edwards this limestone and dolomite karst aquifer is the major fresh water source for the cities, towns and industries along the IH-35 corridor which partially fall within the PCCD area. The unit is also a very strong future candidate of brackish and saline water southeast of the IH-35 corridor that may eventually rival the Carrizo aquifer. 17. Glen Rose certain areas within the Glen Rose along the axis of the San Marcos Arch do harbor large carbonate patch reefs that do contain substantial amounts of brackish and saline water. These Glen Rose patch reefs will undoubtedly be utilized as desalination targets. 18. Bexar occurs as a thin clay and does not serve as an aquifer. 19. James (Cow Creek) does serve as a highly-used household and livestock aquifer along the northwest side of the IH-35 corridor in the Hill Country Balcones Fault System. Recently discovered higher yield Cow Creek wells have been tested in a limited area of the Balcones Fault System. 20. Pine Island occurs as natural gas charged expansive clay that does not serve as an aquifer. 21. Sligo occurs as sandy glauconitic limestone that may serve as a future limited brackish and saline aquifer. 6

10 22. Hosston occurs as a sand and basal gravel aquifer, it serves most of the small town fresh water municipal needs across the Texas Hill Country. The future desalination era will undoubtedly target the brackish and saline portions of the Hosston clastics with the PCCD boundaries. Management Zone Descriptive Table: Period Epoch Group/Formation/Member Description Quaternary Holocene Alluvium Sand, silt, clay Pleistocene Leona Gravel, sand, silt, clay Weches Clay, silt, sand Queen City Sand, clay Tertiary Eocene/Paleocene Reklaw Clay, sand, silt Carrizo Sand, clay Wilcox Sand, clay. silt Midway Clay, silt, sand Navarro Clay, silt, sand Upper Pecan Gap Limestone, clay Austin Chalk Limestone, clay Eagle Ford Clay Buda Limestone Cretaceous Del Rio Clay Georgetown Limestone Edwards Limestone, dolomite Lower Glen Rose Limestone, dolomite, clay Bexar Clay James (Cow Creek) Limestone Pine Island (Hammett) Clay Sligo Limestone, silt Hosston Sand, clay 6. PRODUCTION AND SPACING OF WELLS Production and spacing of all wells within the District is regulated by the District according to the Rules of the District. As noted, the Rules may be changed from time to time. The District has recently revised its Rules, with the latest revision becoming effective as of August 1, 2012, to take into account knowledge gained through its geologic studies that have been ongoing and to address anticipated increases in demands on the aquifers in and regulated by the District. 7. MANAGEMENT OF GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES 7

11 The District evaluates and monitors groundwater availability, and regulates production consistent with the District Rules, the GMAs(10 & 13) adopted Desired Future Conditions, ( DFC ) and the Modeled Available Groundwater determination of the Texas Water Development Board. In consideration of the importance of groundwater availability to the economy and welfare of those in the District, the District anticipates that in the future, groundwater production will be regulated as needed to conserve groundwater, preserve groundwater availability, and protect permitted and exempt groundwater users, in a manner not to unnecessarily and adversely limit production or impact the economic viability of public and private groundwater users. The District will identify and engage in such activities and practices that will permit groundwater production and, as appropriate, will protect the aquifer and groundwater availability by restricting future requested pumping quantities, if necessary, according to the best information then available to the District. Currently there are a number of monitoring wells that are in PCCD s Aquifer Water Level Observation Program that are being used in order to monitor aquifer conditions within the district and to track compliance with the DFCs. On an annual basis, in accord with advice from its technical consultant, PCCD will, if necessary, modify the program. The District will make a regular assessment of water supply and groundwater storage conditions as observed in data from its network and will report those conditions to the Board and to the public. The District will undertake investigations, and co-operate with third-party investigations including neighboring districts, of the groundwater resources within the District, and the results of the investigations will be made available to the public upon being presented at a meeting of the Board. The District will manage the available groundwater based on the Desired Future Conditions and Modeled Available Groundwater determination of the aquifers. The District has adopted Rules to regulate groundwater withdrawals by means of well spacing and production limits or, alternatively, in accord with a study of the effects of the proposed well on the targeted aquifer. The District may deny a water well production permit or limit groundwater withdrawals in accordance with the Rules of the District. In making a determination to deny a permit or limit groundwater withdrawals, the District will consider the available data and evidence and then weigh the public benefit against the individual needs and hardship in accord with State law. The relevant factors to be considered in a determination to grant or deny a well or a production permit or limit groundwater withdrawals are stated in the District's Rules and information furnished can include: 8

12 1. Whether the application contains all the information required to be submitted to the District pursuant to these Rules; 2. Whether the application is in conformance with any applicable requirements under Rule 20 Classification, Spacing and Production Provisions established by the District; 3. Whether the proposed use of groundwater unreasonably affects existing groundwater or surface water resources; 4. Whether the proposed use of groundwater is a beneficial use consistent with District s Certified Groundwater Management Plan; 5. Whether the applicant has agreed to avoid waste and achieve water conservation; 6. Whether the proposed use of the groundwater will result in subsidence; 7. Whether the applicant has agreed that reasonable diligence will be used to protect groundwater quality, and that the applicant will follow well plugging guidelines at the time of well closure; 8. The equitable distribution of the resource; and 9. The potential effect the permit may have on the aquifer, sustainability of the recharge on the aquifer as a whole, and potential impacts to prior existing permitted groundwater users and exempt groundwater users. 10. The modeled available groundwater determined by the executive administrator; 11. The executive administrator's estimate of the current and projected amount of groundwater produced under exemptions granted by district rules and Section ; 12. The amount of groundwater authorized under permits previously issued by the district 13. A reasonable estimate of the amount of groundwater that is actually produced under permits issued by the district; 14. Yearly precipitation and production patterns. 15. Estimated Average Annual Recharge 9

13 The transport of groundwater out of the District is regulated by the District according to the Rules of the District. Comment [DM1]: Do we need any additions to this statement concerning export of water? In pursuit of the District's mission of protecting the resource to facilitate its maximum beneficial use, the District may require reduction of permitted groundwater withdrawals to amounts that, based on then available current information, will not knowingly cause permanent harm to an aquifer. To achieve this purpose, the District may, at the Board's discretion and after notice and hearing, amend or revoke any permit for non-compliance, or reduce the production authorized by permit based upon reliable scientific data for the purpose of protecting the aquifer and groundwater availability. The determination to seek the amendment of a permit will be based on aquifer conditions observed by the District confirmed by reliable scientific analysis. The determination to seek revocation of a permit will be based on compliance and non-compliance with the District's Rules and regulations, and reliable scientific evidence. The District will enforce the terms and conditions of permits and the Rules of the District, as necessary, by fine and/or enjoining the permit holder, or non-permit holder, in a court of competent jurisdiction as provided for in Chapter 36, Texas Water Code. A drought management plan has been adopted by the Board to cope with the effects of water supply deficits due to climatic or other conditions. In its annual review of the drought management plan, the District, in establishing drought triggers and stages, anticipates consideration of the economic effect of conservation measures upon all water resource user groups, the local implications of the degree and effect of changes in water storage conditions, the unique hydrogeological conditions of the aquifers within the District and the appropriate conditions under which to implement the drought management plan. The District will employ reasonable and necessary technical resources at its disposal to evaluate the groundwater resources available within the District and to determine the effectiveness of regulatory or conservation measures. The District anticipates that its drought management plan will provide that a public or private user may appeal to the Board for discretion in enforcement of the provisions of the water supply deficit drought management plan on grounds of adverse economic hardship or unique local conditions. The exercise of discretion by the Board, shall not be construed as limiting the power of the Board. 10

14 8. ACTIONS, PROCEDURES, PERFORMANCE AND PLAN IMPLEMENTATION The District will implement the provisions of this Plan and will utilize the provisions of this Plan as a guidepost for ongoing evaluation determining the direction or priority for all District activities. All operations of the District, all agreements entered into by the District and any additional planning efforts in which the District may participate will be consistent with the provisions of this Plan. The District has adopted Rules relating to the permitting of wells, production and transport of groundwater. The Rules adopted by the District will be modified to take into account this Plan once it has been approved and shall be amended as necessary, pursuant to Chapter 36 of the TEXAS WATER CODE consistent with the provisions of this Plan based upon reliable scientific evidence. All Rules will be enforced. The promulgation and enforcement of the Rules will be based on the best technical data reasonably available. A link to the District rules is provides as follows: The District shall treat all citizens equally. Citizens may apply to the District for a variance in enforcement of the Rules on grounds of adverse economic effect or unique local conditions. In granting a variance to any rule, the Board shall consider the potential for adverse effect on adjacent landowners and the rights of other groundwater owners and users within the District. The exercise of said discretion by the Board, shall not be construed as limiting the power of the Board. The District will seek cooperation with other agencies in the implementation of this Plan and the management of groundwater supplies within the District. The District believes that there is a significant issue that affects groundwater within its boundaries and affects the District s ability to effectively manage the groundwater resources within the District. That issue is that there are very productive regions of aquifers that are near but not within Plum Creek Conservation District s regulatory authority. Should there be large volume water production from aquifers in these areas, there is significant potential that such production will impact water quantity and/or water quality of users in the District. The fact that Plum Creek Conservation District's surface boundaries also includes areas that are within the Barton Springs Edwards Aquifer Conservation District and the Edwards Aquifer Authority [the District does have authority over any 11

15 aquifers in Hays and Caldwell County within its boundary that are not regulated by either the Edwards Aquifer Authority or the Barton Springs-Edwards Aquifer Conservation District -] indicates that Plum Creek should cooperate with [and provide some assistance to] the EAA and the Barton Springs-Edwards District while developing plans for understanding and use of water resources to the fast growing area along Interstate 35 between San Antonio and Austin. PCCD's territory extends from Northwest of IH 35 to IH 10 and encompasses much of an area that is projected to have rapid growth. The completion of SH 130, along with other regional projects is considered by many to be a necessary infrastructure component to allow for population and economic growth. Developers and retail water suppliers are already searching for additional water supplies to meet growing demand. Finally, there are significant long-existing oil and gas operations in the southern part of the District along with the possible future exploration and development of gas-liquids shale plays. Should those activities continue to increase as the price for oil and gas resources stays high, there may be significant consumption of water, or other groundwater impacts such as the potential for pollution, related to such activities that is outside the scope of regulatory power of any groundwater district. For these reasons, all activities of the District will be undertaken in co-operation and coordinated with the appropriate state, regional or local water management entities where they are present. However, simply stated, in Hays County there are many such agencies looking at management of groundwater; in Caldwell County the absence of a groundwater agency in the eastern and western part of the county makes management of the groundwater resources in the District more challenging. 9. METHODOLOGY FOR TRACKING DISTRICT PROGRESS IN ACHIEVING MANAGEMENT GOALS The Groundwater Manager of the District will prepare and present an annual report to the Board of Directors on the performance of the District with respect to achieving its management goals and objectives. The presentation of the report will occur during the last monthly Board meeting each fiscal year, beginning after the adoption and approval of this Plan. The report will include an enumeration and listing of activities furthering the District s management objectives during the fiscal year. Each activity will be referenced to the estimated expenditure of staff time and District resources used in accomplishment of the activity. The notations of activity frequency, staff time and resources used will be referenced to the appropriate performance standard for each management objective describing the activity, so that the effectiveness and efficiency of the District s operations may be evaluated. The Board will maintain the adopted report on file, for public 12

16 inspection, at the District's offices. This methodology will apply to all management goals contained within this plan. 10. MANAGEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, & PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 10.1 Providing the Most Efficient Use of Groundwater Management Objectives: 1. The PCCD Aquifer Water Level Observation Well Program will have at least 6 observation wells located according to management zones within the District, and measure those wells at least one time a year. 2. As part of the Aquifer Water Level Observation Program, the District will geographically divide the surface area overlying the aquifers of Plum Creek Conservation District into a grid-type network of units. 3. The district will have a goal of establishing at least one monitoring water well in each of these units. 4. The District will provide educational leadership to citizens within the District concerning this subject. The activity will be accomplished annually through at least one printed publication, such as a brochure, and public speaking at service organizations and public schools as provided for in the District's Public Education Program. 5. The District will use its best efforts to obtain information on water being produced from areas in Caldwell County that are outside the boundaries of the District. 6. The District will use its best efforts to obtain information on groundwater being produced from groundwater aquifers in counties surrounding the District as well as in areas close to the District that are not in a groundwater conservation district in order to develop information about impacts of such production on groundwater in the District. Performance Standards: 1. The PCCD Aquifer Water Level Observation Well Program will have at least 6 observation wells located according to management zones within the District. 2. Water levels at these observation wells will be measured a minimum of one time during the year. 13

17 3. As part of the Aquifer Water Level Observation Program the District will geographically divide the surface area overlying the aquifers of Plum Creek Conservation District into a grid type network of units within one year of the adoption of this plan. 4. On an annual basis the district will assess the District s progress of establishing at least one monitoring well in each of these units. 5. PCCD representatives will circulate at least one publication and participate in one speaking engagement each year. 6. PCCD representatives will attend and participate in GMA meetings appropriate to the District s regulatory authority. 7. PCCD will periodically seek information from nearby groundwater districts not in the same GMA but drawing from the same aquifers regulated by the District Controlling and Preventing Waste of Groundwater. Management Objective: The District will provide educational leadership to citizens within the District concerning this subject. The activity will be accomplished annually through at least one printed publication, such as a brochure. Performance Standard: 1. Each calendar year Representatives of Plum Creek will prepare at least one informational article listing current data related to groundwater production and well levels. The goal of the article is to make those who use and depend on the groundwater aware of their use, aware of the impacts of their use, and the need to be responsible in that use. 2. At its offices Plum Creek will maintain an inventory of publications of others, such as those prepared by the Guadalupe Blanco River Authority about the necessity for conservation, and serve as a local source for distribution of those publications Controlling and Preventing Subsidence 14

18 It is uncertain as to whether subsidence from the production of groundwater would likely occur in the Plum Creek Conservation District. The District historically has not, as we know, experienced any subsidence from any cause. Accordingly, the District s Plan does not contain any Management Objective or related Performance Standards to address the issue of non-existent subsidence. The TWDB has commissioned a subsidence study for the Major and Minor aquifers of Texas. If after reviewing TWDB s report, it shows scientific evidence of subsidence or the potential there of in PCCD, then the District would further investigate the possibility of whether there would be landowners negatively impacted. Alluvium is poorly consolidated, but generally too thin to experience measurable (if any) subsidence due to groundwater withdrawals Addressing Conjunctive Surface Water Management Issues Management Objective: Each year the District will seek conferral with the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority (GBRA) and/or other local political subdivisions and water and wastewater utilities on cooperative opportunities for conjunctive resource management. Performance Standard: 1. Each year the District will seek conferral with the GBRA, other political subdivisions or water and wastewater utilities providing retail water service within Plum Creek s boundaries, to gain information about conjunctive resource management. 2. The District will continue to participate in the quarterly meetings of the Plum Creek Watershed Project through the time of completion of the water quality management plan being developed in that effort 10.5 Addressing Drought Conditions Management Objective: Review the Drought Management Strategy Plan annually, and revise it if necessary based upon the availability of additional scientific data collected by or presented to the Board. The Drought Management Strategy Plan will be implemented when specified conditions require. 15

19 Performance Standards: 1. Review on an annual basis all of the conditions and requirements specified in the Drought Management Strategy Plan that would trigger its implementation. 2. Use data that are available from local weather stations monitoring rainfall, looking at the correlation between rainfall, water levels, groundwater recharge and availability. 3. Provide a link on the District s website for TWDB s drought web page Addressing Natural Resource Issues That Impact the Use and Availability of Groundwater and Which are Impacted By the Use of Groundwater Management Objectives: 1. Each year the District will seek conferral with a representative of the Texas Railroad Commission (RRC) on the impact of oil and gas production or waste and disposal operations associated with oil and gas production on groundwater availability and quality, as well as the impact of groundwater production on the production of oil and gas in the District. 2. Also, during each year the District will evaluate all permit applications for new production injection or disposal wells permitted by the Railroad Commission, if any are filed, and the information submitted by the applicants on those wells prior to drilling, in order to assess the impact of these wells on the groundwater resources in the District. Performance Standards: 1. Will seek conferral annually with a representative of the Texas RRC ; 2. The addition of available RRC well data to the District s database; 3. Report to the PCCD Board of Directors when new groundwater well permit applications are filed, and the possible impacts of those new wells on the groundwater resources in the District; and 16

20 4. Annual reports to the Board about consumption and use of groundwater for commercial purposes, including irrigation uses and enhanced oil and gas production when information is available Addressing Conservation, Recharge Enhancement, Rainwater Harvesting, Precipitation Enhancement, or Brush Control where appropriate and cost-effective Management Objectives: 1. The District will provide educational leadership and encouragement to citizens within the District on the need for water conservation and publicize the benefits of rainwater harvesting and brush control. The educational efforts and publicity will be through distribution of brochures produced either by the District or by others and made available by the District and through the presentation annually of informational articles that tabulate data developed by the District on the groundwater resources being monitored. Each of the following topics will be addressed in the publications: A. Conservation B. Rainwater Harvesting C. Brush Control 2. With respect to recharge enhancement, the District will continue to develop geologic data to map and gain understanding of the relationship between recharge to and discharge from various formations to each other and to Plum Creek as it flows through the District. At this time, the relationships among the aquifers and the Creek are not well documented or understood. It is known that recharge of much of the groundwater that can be found in the District, and in areas next to the District that are not in any groundwater district, originate outside the boundaries of the District. There is some natural recharge to aquifers in the District from both streams and from areas where those aquifers are at the surface. However, the formations found in the District are not readily susceptible to recharge enhancement. 3. The District has an active brush control program for the flood water retention structures that it maintains. The 17

21 District also cooperates with the US Department of Agriculture in agricultural conservation efforts and actively supports the local Soil and Water Conservation District. 4. The District has participated in the funding of a rainwater harvesting demonstration project at the Luling Foundation and will continue to monitor the results of that project and report those results in its articles. 5. The District does not believe that precipitation enhancement is appropriate and cost effective in its area. At the same time, PCCD is aware of efforts being implemented by other districts and will continue to monitor the information gathered from those and determine whether such efforts might be attempted by the District. The District will continue to assess the need and opportunity for precipitation enhancement in the District at least once every five years. Performance Standards: 1. Preparation and distribution of at least two publications each year containing information about conservation, rainwater harvesting and brush control efforts. 2. The District staff will continue to cooperate with the Natural Resource Conservation Service to control brush on the 28 flood water retention structures maintained by the District. In addition, the District will participate in at least one meeting each year with the local soil and water conservation district to discuss brush control efforts, and will continue to support the local soil and water conservation districts efforts through and annual financial contribution. 3. The District will obtain, if available, at least one report each year about the relationship between recharge of aquifers in the District and rainfall on the surface to determine whether it would be appropriate and cost effective to develop a trial plan for recharge enhancement. 4. At least once every 5 years the staff will report to the Board on the results of nearby precipitation enhancement activities so the Board can consider the feasibility of participating in any efforts in the area of lands that are serving as sources of recharge for groundwater found in the District. If the Board determines that precipitation enhancement might be appropriate and cost effective, within two years the Board will develop and adopt a 18

22 program allowing participation in precipitation efforts ongoing in the region Mitigation & Desired Future Conditions of Groundwater Resources The mitigation plan will be reviewed on an annual basis and revised if necessary in order to be compliant with the adopted DFCs and any current or new state law in effect. Further, any projects that have been mitigated will also be reviewed on an annual basis. Review of groundwater resources in the District in comparison with the Desired Future Conditions of those resources and preparation of a recommendation for any mitigation actions within six (6) months or later if warranted Addressing the Desired Future Conditions established under TWC Management Objective: At least once every three years, the District will monitor water levels and evaluate whether the change in water levels is in conformance with the DFCs adopted by the District. The District will estimate total annual groundwater production for each aquifer based on the water use reports, estimated exempted use, and other relevant information, and compare these production estimates to the MAGs. Performance Standard: 1. At least once every three years, the executive manager will report to the Board the measured water levels obtained from the monitoring wells within each Management Zone, the average measured drawdown for each Management Zone calculated from the measured water levels of the monitoring wells within the Management Zone, a comparison of the average measured drawdowns for each Management Zone with the DFCs for each Management Zone, and the District s progress in conforming with the DFCs. 2. At least once every three years, the executive manager will report to the Board the total permitted production and the estimated total annual production for each aquifer and compare these amounts to the MAGs for each aquifer. 4. In conjunction with information from PCCD s drought management plan, Aquifer Water Level Observation Well Program, water use production patterns, analysis from PCCD s geological consultant and other pertinent technical data, the board, at least once every three(3) years will determine if conditions are present that would jeopardize 19

23 DFC compliance and if so, schedule a hearing to address limiting water use for water well production permit holders Alternative Supply Management Objective: 1. The District will assess the need and feasibility, including funding options, of developing a program to research, participate in regional studies with other groundwater conservation districts and regional agencies in order to look at the potential benefits of alternative water supply sources such as underdeveloped aquifers, one being the Trinity Aquifer, desalinization, rainwater harvesting, and aquifer recovery and storage in and around our district. Performance Standard: 1. Assess the groundwater resources of the Trinity Group and saline Edwards. The district will assess the need to develop one or more monitoring wells in order to determine the aquifer characteristics and potential for public supply and to cooperate with GCDs that have similar goals. 2. The district will evaluate and support studies on ASR and on desalination projects through cooperative collaboration or financial assistance. 11. PROJECTED WATER DEMANDS WITHIN THE DISTRICT Please refer to Appendix A-Estimated Historical Groundwater Use and 2017 State Water Plan Datasets 12. PROJECTED SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES WITHIN THE DISTRICT Please refer to Appendix A-Estimated Historical Groundwater Use and 2017 State Water Plan Datasets 13. WATER NEEDS WITHIN THE DISTRICT Please refer to Appendix A-Estimated Historical Groundwater Use and 2017 State Water Plan Datasets 20

24 14. WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES WITHIN THE DISTRICT Please refer to Appendix A-Estimated Historical Groundwater Use and 2017 State Water Plan Datasets 15. ESTIMATE OF GROUNDWATER USE IN THE DISTRICT Please refer to Appendix A-Estimated Historical Groundwater Use and 2017 State Water Plan Datasets 16. Annual Amount of Recharge From Precipitation to the Groundwater Resources within the District Please refer to Appendix B-GAM Run : Plum Creek Conservation District Management Plan. 17. Annual Volume of Water that Discharges from the Aquifer to Springs and Surface Water Bodies Please refer to Appendix B-GAM Run : Plum Creek Conservation District Management Plan. 18. Estimate of the Annual Volume of Flow into the District, out of the District, and Between Aquifers in the District Please refer to Appendix B-GAM Run : Plum Creek Conservation District Management Plan. 19. Estimate of Modeled Available Groundwater in District Based on Desired Future Conditions Texas Water Code defines modeled available groundwater as the amount of water that the executive administrator determines may be produced on an average annual basis to achieve a desired future condition established under Section The joint planning process set forth in Texas Water Code must be collectively conducted by all groundwater conservation districts within the same GMA. The District is a member of GMA 10 & 13. GMA 10 and GMA 13 adopted DFCs, as summarized below, and then forwarded them to the TWDB for MAG development which are also shown below. TABLE 1: Desired Future Conditions for GMA 10 & 13 21

25 GMA Aquifers Adopted DFC Adoption Date 10 Trinity Group A regional average well drawdown during average recharge conditions that does not exceed 25 feet (including August 23, 2010 exempt and non-exempt well use) 10 Saline Edwards Well drawdown at the salinefreshwater interface (the so called Edwards bad water line ) in the northern subdivision of GMA 10 that averages no more than 5 feet and does not exceed a maximum of 25 feet at any point on the interface. August 4, 2010 In Reference to scenario 4 (GAM run ), and an 13 average drawdown of 23 ft., for Carrizo-Wilcox, the Sparta, Weches,Queen City, Etal Reklaw, Carrizo, and Wilcox Aquifers. April 9, 2010 TABLE 2: Modeled Available Groundwater for the Plum Creek Conservation District GMA Aquifers MAG (acre-ft/ per year) TWDB MAG Report GTA Aquifer 10 Trinity Group 238 Assessment MAG GTA Aquifer Assessment 10 Saline Edwards MAG Total Carrizo-Wilcox, 2012 = 18,122 ac-ft./yr. 13 GAM Run MAG Etal 2060 = 17,138 ac-ft./yr. 13 Carrizo 3498 GAM Run MAG 13 Wilcox Group 2012 =14,602 ac-ft./yr. GAM Run MAG 2060 =13,618 ac-ft./yr. 13 Queen City 22 GAM Run MAG 20. GEOLOGY MAP OF PCCD Please refer to Appendix C. 22

26 We the undersigned members of the Board of Directors do hereby certify and confirm the adoption of this revised and amended Groundwater Management Plan of the Plum Creek Conservation District on this the 13 th day of November, 2007 as evidenced by our signatures below: Board of Directors James A. Holt, Jr., President James O. Lipscomb, Vice President Lucy Knight, Director Peter Reinecke, Director Ben Twidwell, Director Fred Rothert, Director Attested by: Johnie Halliburton, Executive Manager 23

27 Estimated Historical Groundwater Use And 2017 State Water Plan Datasets: Plum Creek Conservation District by Stephen Allen Texas Water Development Board Groundwater Division Groundwater Technical Assistance Section (512) September 20, 2017 GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN DATA: This package of water data reports (part 1 of a 2-part package of information) is being provided to groundwater conservation districts to help them meet the requirements for approval of their fiveyear groundwater management plan. Each report in the package addresses a specific numbered requirement in the Texas Water Development Board's groundwater management plan checklist. The checklist can be viewed and downloaded from this web address: The five reports included in this part are: 1. Estimated Historical Groundwater Use (checklist item 2) from the TWDB Historical Water Use Survey (WUS) 2. Projected Surface Water Supplies (checklist item 6) 3. Projected Water Demands (checklist item 7) 4. Projected Water Supply Needs (checklist item 8) 5. Projected Water Management Strategies (checklist item 9) from the 2017 Texas State Water Plan (SWP) Part 2 of the 2-part package is the groundwater availability model (GAM) report for the District (checklist items 3 through 5). The District should have received, or will receive, this report from the Groundwater Availability Modeling Section. Questions about the GAM can be directed to Dr. Shirley Wade, shirley.wade@twdb.texas.gov, (512)

28 DISCLAIMER: The data presented in this report represents the most up-to-date WUS and 2017 SWP data available as of 9/20/2017. Although it does not happen frequently, either of these datasets are subject to change pending the availability of more accurate WUS data or an amendment to the 2017 SWP. District personnel must review these datasets and correct any discrepancies in order to ensure approval of their groundwater management plan. The WUS dataset can be verified at this web address: The 2017 SWP dataset can be verified by contacting Sabrina Anderson or ). The values presented in the data tables of this report are county-based. In cases where groundwater conservation districts cover only a portion of one or more counties the data values are modified with an apportioning multiplier to create new values that more accurately represent conditions within district boundaries. The multiplier used in the following formula is a land area ratio: (data value * (land area of district in county / land area of county)). For two of the four SWP tables (Projected Surface Water Supplies and Projected Water Demands) only the county-wide water user group (WUG) data values (county other, manufacturing, steam electric power, irrigation, mining and livestock) are modified using the multiplier. WUG values for municipalities, water supply corporations, and utility districts are not apportioned; instead, their full values are retained when they are located within the district, and eliminated when they are located outside (we ask each district to identify these entity locations). The remaining SWP tables (Projected Water Supply Needs and Projected Water Management Strategies) are not modified because district-specific values are not statutorily required. Each district needs only consider the county values in these tables. In the WUS table every category of water use (including municipal) is apportioned. Staff determined that breaking down the annual municipal values into individual WUGs was too complex. TWDB recognizes that the apportioning formula used is not perfect but it is the best available process with respect to time and staffing constraints. If a district believes it has data that is more accurate it can add those data to the plan with an explanation of how the data were derived. Apportioning percentages that the TWDB used are listed above each applicable table. For additional questions regarding this data, please contact Stephen Allen (stephen.allen@twdb.texas.gov or ). Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

29 Estimated Historical Water Use TWDB Historical Water Use Survey (WUS) Data Groundwater and surface water historical use estimates are currently unavailable for calendar year TWDB staff anticipates the calculation and posting of these estimates at a later date. CALDWELL COUNTY 51.56% (multiplier) All values are in acre-feet Year Source Municipal Manufacturing Mining Steam Electric Irrigation Livestock Total 2015 GW ,222 SW 1, , GW 1, ,470 SW 1, , GW 1, ,420 SW 1, , GW 1, ,674 SW 1, , GW 1, ,172 SW 1, , GW 1, ,815 SW 1, , GW 1, ,562 SW 1, , GW 1, ,504 SW 1, , GW ,054 SW 1, , GW 1, ,317 SW 1, , GW 1, ,427 SW 1, , GW 1, ,044 SW , GW 1, ,097 SW , GW 2, ,168 SW , GW 1, ,151 SW , GW 2, ,166 SW ,425 Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

30 HAYS COUNTY 9.11% (multiplier) All values are in acre-feet Year Source Municipal Manufacturing Mining Steam Electric Irrigation Livestock Total 2015 GW SW 1, , GW ,005 SW 1, , GW 1, ,263 SW 1, , GW 1, ,313 SW 1, , GW 1, ,431 SW 1, , GW 1, ,323 SW , GW 1, ,265 SW , GW 1, ,271 SW , GW ,126 SW , GW 1, ,219 SW GW ,052 SW GW ,013 SW GW ,041 SW GW ,039 SW GW ,047 SW GW SW Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

31 Projected Surface Water Supplies TWDB 2017 State Water Plan Data CALDWELL COUNTY 51.56% (multiplier) All values are in acre-feet RWPG WUG WUG Basin Source Name L COUNTY LINE WSC GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L L COUNTY-OTHER, CALDWELL GONZALES COUNTY WSC GUADALUPE GUADALUPE GUADALUPE RUN- OF-RIVER CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L LIVESTOCK, CALDWELL COLORADO COLORADO LIVESTOCK LOCAL SUPPLY L LIVESTOCK, CALDWELL GUADALUPE GUADALUPE LIVESTOCK LOCAL SUPPLY L MARTINDALE GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L MARTINDALE GUADALUPE GUADALUPE RUN- OF-RIVER L MAXWELL WSC GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L MAXWELL WSC GUADALUPE GUADALUPE RUN- OF-RIVER L SAN MARCOS GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L UHLAND GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR Sum of Projected Surface Water Supplies (acre-feet) 1,811 1,831 1,839 1,840 1,839 1,837 HAYS COUNTY 9.11% (multiplier) All values are in acre-feet RWPG WUG WUG Basin Source Name K AUSTIN COLORADO COLORADO RUN-OF ,519 2,749 RIVER K BUDA COLORADO CANYON 1,381 1,292 1,181 1, LAKE/RESERVOIR K COUNTY-OTHER, HAYS COLORADO HIGHLAND LAKES LAKE/RESERVOIR SYSTEM K DRIPPING SPRINGS COLORADO HIGHLAND LAKES LAKE/RESERVOIR SYSTEM K DRIPPING SPRINGS COLORADO HIGHLAND LAKES ,126 WSC LAKE/RESERVOIR SYSTEM K LIVESTOCK, HAYS COLORADO COLORADO LIVESTOCK LOCAL SUPPLY K WEST TRAVIS COUNTY COLORADO HIGHLAND LAKES 4,521 4,521 4,521 4,521 4,521 4,521 Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

32 PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY LAKE/RESERVOIR SYSTEM L BUDA GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L COUNTY LINE WSC GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L COUNTY-OTHER, HAYS GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L CRYSTAL CLEAR WSC GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L GOFORTH SUD GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L IRRIGATION, HAYS GUADALUPE GUADALUPE RUN- OF-RIVER L KYLE GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L LIVESTOCK, HAYS GUADALUPE GUADALUPE LIVESTOCK LOCAL SUPPLY L MAXWELL WSC GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L MAXWELL WSC GUADALUPE GUADALUPE RUN- OF-RIVER L SAN MARCOS GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L STEAM ELECTRIC POWER, HAYS GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR L UHLAND GUADALUPE CANYON LAKE/RESERVOIR ,050 1,050 1,050 1,050 1,050 1, ,743 5,743 5,743 5,743 5,743 5, ,998 9,998 9,998 9,997 9,997 9, Sum of Projected Surface Water Supplies (acre-feet) 25,299 25,536 25,834 26,456 27,620 29,039 Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

33 Projected Water Demands TWDB 2017 State Water Plan Data Please note that the demand numbers presented here include the plumbing code savings found in the Regional and State Water Plans. CALDWELL COUNTY 51.56% (multiplier) All values are in acre-feet RWPG WUG WUG Basin L AQUA WSC COLORADO L AQUA WSC GUADALUPE L COUNTY LINE WSC GUADALUPE L COUNTY-OTHER, CALDWELL COLORADO L COUNTY-OTHER, CALDWELL GUADALUPE L CREEDMOOR-MAHA WSC COLORADO L CREEDMOOR-MAHA WSC GUADALUPE L GOFORTH SUD GUADALUPE L GONZALES COUNTY WSC GUADALUPE L IRRIGATION, CALDWELL COLORADO L IRRIGATION, CALDWELL GUADALUPE L LIVESTOCK, CALDWELL COLORADO L LIVESTOCK, CALDWELL GUADALUPE L LOCKHART GUADALUPE 2,251 2,676 3,105 3,547 4,010 4,465 L LULING GUADALUPE 950 1,125 1,301 1,484 1,678 1,868 L MANUFACTURING, CALDWELL GUADALUPE L MARTINDALE GUADALUPE L MAXWELL WSC GUADALUPE L MINING, CALDWELL COLORADO L MINING, CALDWELL GUADALUPE L MUSTANG RIDGE COLORADO L MUSTANG RIDGE GUADALUPE L NIEDERWALD GUADALUPE L POLONIA WSC COLORADO L POLONIA WSC GUADALUPE ,055 1,175 L SAN MARCOS GUADALUPE L UHLAND GUADALUPE Sum of Projected Water Demands (acre-feet) 6,738 7,772 8,825 9,920 11,054 12,203 HAYS COUNTY 9.11% (multiplier) All values are in acre-feet RWPG WUG WUG Basin K AUSTIN COLORADO ,519 2,749 Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

34 K BUDA COLORADO 1,769 2,508 3,420 4,564 5,860 7,338 K CIMARRON PARK WATER COLORADO COMPANY K COUNTY-OTHER, HAYS COLORADO K DRIPPING SPRINGS COLORADO K DRIPPING SPRINGS WSC COLORADO ,091 1,353 1,652 K GOFORTH SUD COLORADO K IRRIGATION, HAYS COLORADO K LIVESTOCK, HAYS COLORADO K MANUFACTURING, HAYS COLORADO K MINING, HAYS COLORADO K MOUNTAIN CITY COLORADO K PLUM CREEK WATER COMPANY COLORADO K WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC COLORADO UTILITY AGENCY 4,093 5,758 7,795 10,343 13,226 16,508 L BUDA GUADALUPE L COUNTY LINE WSC GUADALUPE L COUNTY-OTHER, HAYS GUADALUPE ,077 1,638 L CREEDMOOR-MAHA WSC GUADALUPE L CRYSTAL CLEAR WSC GUADALUPE ,143 1,338 L GOFORTH SUD GUADALUPE 1,384 1,753 2,220 2,818 3,504 4,287 L IRRIGATION, HAYS GUADALUPE L KYLE GUADALUPE 5,156 7,680 9,133 9,119 9,108 9,104 L LIVESTOCK, HAYS GUADALUPE L MANUFACTURING, HAYS GUADALUPE L MAXWELL WSC GUADALUPE L MOUNTAIN CITY GUADALUPE L NIEDERWALD GUADALUPE L PLUM CREEK WATER COMPANY GUADALUPE 736 1,068 1,048 1,032 1,019 1,009 L SAN MARCOS GUADALUPE 11,934 13,941 16,430 19,485 23,205 27,655 L STEAM ELECTRIC POWER, GUADALUPE HAYS L UHLAND GUADALUPE L WIMBERLEY GUADALUPE ,018 1,300 1,622 1,990 L WIMBERLEY WSC GUADALUPE ,247 1,617 2,039 L WOODCREEK GUADALUPE Sum of Projected Water Demands (acre-feet) 30,213 39,123 48,208 57,781 69,687 83,694 Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

35 Projected Water Supply Needs TWDB 2017 State Water Plan Data Negative values (in red) reflect a projected water supply need, positive values a surplus. CALDWELL COUNTY All values are in acre-feet RWPG WUG WUG Basin L AQUA WSC COLORADO L AQUA WSC GUADALUPE L COUNTY LINE WSC GUADALUPE L COUNTY-OTHER, CALDWELL COLORADO L COUNTY-OTHER, CALDWELL GUADALUPE 1, L CREEDMOOR-MAHA WSC COLORADO L CREEDMOOR-MAHA WSC GUADALUPE L GOFORTH SUD GUADALUPE L GONZALES COUNTY WSC GUADALUPE L IRRIGATION, CALDWELL COLORADO L IRRIGATION, CALDWELL GUADALUPE L LIVESTOCK, CALDWELL COLORADO L LIVESTOCK, CALDWELL GUADALUPE L LOCKHART GUADALUPE ,042-1,484-1,947-2,402 L LULING GUADALUPE L MANUFACTURING, CALDWELL GUADALUPE L MARTINDALE GUADALUPE L MAXWELL WSC GUADALUPE L MINING, CALDWELL COLORADO L MINING, CALDWELL GUADALUPE L MUSTANG RIDGE COLORADO L MUSTANG RIDGE GUADALUPE L NIEDERWALD GUADALUPE L POLONIA WSC COLORADO L POLONIA WSC GUADALUPE L SAN MARCOS GUADALUPE L UHLAND GUADALUPE Sum of Projected Water Supply Needs (acre-feet) ,368-2,223-3,154-4,080 HAYS COUNTY All values are in acre-feet RWPG WUG WUG Basin K AUSTIN COLORADO K BUDA COLORADO ,690-2,974-4,429-6,088 Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

36 K CIMARRON PARK WATER COMPANY COLORADO K COUNTY-OTHER, HAYS COLORADO ,587-2,489-3,382 K DRIPPING SPRINGS COLORADO K DRIPPING SPRINGS WSC COLORADO K GOFORTH SUD COLORADO K IRRIGATION, HAYS COLORADO K LIVESTOCK, HAYS COLORADO K MANUFACTURING, HAYS COLORADO K MINING, HAYS COLORADO ,047-1,131-1,340-1,579 K MOUNTAIN CITY COLORADO K PLUM CREEK WATER COMPANY COLORADO K WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY COLORADO ,974-5,522-8,405-11,687 L BUDA GUADALUPE L COUNTY LINE WSC GUADALUPE L COUNTY-OTHER, HAYS GUADALUPE 3,101 2, ,109-6,654-12,812 L CREEDMOOR-MAHA WSC GUADALUPE L CRYSTAL CLEAR WSC GUADALUPE L GOFORTH SUD GUADALUPE 2,763 2,340 1,810 1, L IRRIGATION, HAYS GUADALUPE L KYLE GUADALUPE 1,176-1,348-2,801-2,787-2,776-2,783 L LIVESTOCK, HAYS GUADALUPE L MANUFACTURING, HAYS GUADALUPE L MAXWELL WSC GUADALUPE L MOUNTAIN CITY GUADALUPE L NIEDERWALD GUADALUPE L PLUM CREEK WATER COMPANY GUADALUPE L SAN MARCOS GUADALUPE 1, ,629-5,685-9,405-13,855 L STEAM ELECTRIC POWER, HAYS GUADALUPE 4,646 4,411 3,394 2,668 1, L UHLAND GUADALUPE L WIMBERLEY GUADALUPE ,146 L WIMBERLEY WSC GUADALUPE ,356 L WOODCREEK GUADALUPE Sum of Projected Water Supply Needs (acre-feet) ,148-12,635-22,756-38,594-57,222 Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

37 Projected Water Management Strategies TWDB 2017 State Water Plan Data CALDWELL COUNTY WUG, Basin (RWPG) All values are in acre-feet Water Management Strategy Source Name [Origin] COUNTY LINE WSC, GUADALUPE (L ) BRACKISH WILCOX GROUNDWATER FOR CRWA CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [WILSON] CRWA SIESTA PROJECT DIRECT REUSE [BEXAR] CRWA SIESTA PROJECT SAN ANTONIO RUN-OF- RIVER [WILSON] REUSE - KYLE/COUNTY LINE WSC DIRECT REUSE [HAYS] COUNTY-OTHER, CALDWELL, COLORADO (L ) MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) COUNTY-OTHER, CALDWELL, GUADALUPE (L ) [CALDWELL] MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) GOFORTH SUD, GUADALUPE (L ) [CALDWELL] GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) GONZALES COUNTY WSC, GUADALUPE (L ) GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] [CALDWELL] LOCAL CARRIZO AQUIFER DEVELOPMENT MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) LOCKHART, GUADALUPE (L ) CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [GONZALES] [CALDWELL] DROUGHT MANAGEMENT - LOCKHART [CALDWELL] GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (SUBURBAN) LULING, GUADALUPE (L ) GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] [CALDWELL] ,120 1,120 1,120 1,484 1,947 2, ,233 1,120 1,120 1,484 1,947 2,474 GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ GUADALUPE RUN-OF- 1,673 1,674 1,674 1,673 1,678 1,868 Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

38 ASR (OPTION 3C) MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) MARTINDALE, GUADALUPE (L ) DROUGHT MANAGEMENT - MARTINDALE HAYS/CALDWELL PUA PROJECT MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) MUSTANG RIDGE, COLORADO (L ) MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) MUSTANG RIDGE, GUADALUPE (L ) MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) NIEDERWALD, GUADALUPE (L ) RIVER [GONZALES] [CALDWELL] [CALDWELL] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [CALDWELL] [CALDWELL] [CALDWELL] [CALDWELL] ,673 1,674 1,674 1,673 1,678 1, DROUGHT MANAGEMENT - NIEDERWALD GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) POLONIA WSC, COLORADO (L ) [CALDWELL] GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] LOCAL CARRIZO AQUIFER WITH CONVERSION POLONIA WSC, GUADALUPE (L ) LOCAL CARRIZO AQUIFER WITH CONVERSION SAN MARCOS, GUADALUPE (L ) CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [CALDWELL] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [CALDWELL] GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) HAYS/CALDWELL PUA PROJECT MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (SUBURBAN) GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [CALDWELL] [CALDWELL] REUSE - SAN MARCOS DIRECT REUSE [HAYS] UHLAND, GUADALUPE (L ) MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) [CALDWELL] Sum of Projected Water Management Strategies (acre-feet) 2,953 2,869 2,938 3,540 4,291 5,305 Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

39 HAYS COUNTY WUG, Basin (RWPG) All values are in acre-feet Water Management Strategy Source Name [Origin] AUSTIN, COLORADO (K ) DROUGHT MANAGEMENT BUDA, COLORADO (K ) [HAYS] DIRECT REUSE - BUDA DIRECT REUSE [HAYS] 2,240 2,240 1,740 1,740 1,740 1,740 DROUGHT MANAGEMENT EDWARDS / MIDDLE TRINITY ASR HCPUA PIPELINE - REGION K RECOMMENDED MUNICIPAL CONSERVATION - BUDA SALINE EDWARDS ASR SALINE EDWARDS ASR (SALINE) COUNTY-OTHER, HAYS, COLORADO (K ) BRUSH CONTROL DROUGHT MANAGEMENT EDWARDS / MIDDLE TRINITY ASR HAYS COUNTY PIPELINE - REGION K RECOMMENDED SALINE EDWARDS ASR SALINE EDWARDS ASR (SALINE) DRIPPING SPRINGS, COLORADO (K ) [HAYS] TRINITY AQUIFER ASR [HAYS] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [GONZALES] [HAYS] EDWARDS AQUIFER ASR [TRAVIS] EDWARDS-BFZ AQUIFER [TRAVIS] COLORADO RUN-OF- RIVER [HAYS] [HAYS] TRINITY AQUIFER ASR [HAYS] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [GONZALES] EDWARDS AQUIFER ASR [TRAVIS] EDWARDS-BFZ AQUIFER [TRAVIS] ,690 2,467 2,467 2, ,505 4,464 5,306 6,315 6,602 6, , ,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2, ,379 3,518 3,677 3,812 3,946 DROUGHT MANAGEMENT HAYS COUNTY PIPELINE - REGION K RECOMMENDED MUNICIPAL CONSERVATION - DRIPPING SPRINGS WATER PURCHASE DRIPPING SPRINGS WSC, COLORADO (K ) [HAYS] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [GONZALES] [HAYS] HIGHLAND LAKES LAKE/RESERVOIR SYSTEM [RESERVOIR] DROUGHT MANAGEMENT Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

40 HAYS COUNTY PIPELINE - REGION K RECOMMENDED MUNICIPAL CONSERVATION - DRIPPING SPRINGS WSC GOFORTH SUD, COLORADO (K ) [HAYS] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [GONZALES] [HAYS] 0 1,000 1,000 1, ,260 1,324 1,405 1,369 1,206 DROUGHT MANAGEMENT GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) MINING, HAYS, COLORADO (K ) [HAYS] GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] [HAYS] DIRECT REUSE - BUDA DIRECT REUSE [HAYS] EDWARDS / MIDDLE TRINITY ASR EXPANSION OF CURRENT GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES - TRINITY AQUIFER PLUM CREEK WATER COMPANY, COLORADO (K ) TRINITY AQUIFER ASR [HAYS] TRINITY AQUIFER [HAYS] ,047 1,047 1,047 1, ,647 1,647 1,647 1,647 DROUGHT MANAGEMENT HAYS/CALDWELL PUA PROJECT [HAYS] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [CALDWELL] WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY, COLORADO (K ) DROUGHT MANAGEMENT HAYS COUNTY PIPELINE - REGION K RECOMMENDED LCRA - LANE CITY RESERVOIR MUNICIPAL CONSERVATION - WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUA COUNTY LINE WSC, GUADALUPE (L ) [HAYS] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [GONZALES] LCRA NEW OFF-CHANNEL RESERVOIRS (2020 DECADE) [RESERVOIR] [HAYS] 819 1,152 1,559 2,069 2,645 3, ,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1, ,700 3,000 5,800 5, ,070 2,064 3,501 5,348 7,674 1,224 3,722 7,323 9,570 14,793 17,776 BRACKISH WILCOX GROUNDWATER FOR CRWA Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017 CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [WILSON] CRWA SIESTA PROJECT DIRECT REUSE [BEXAR] CRWA SIESTA PROJECT SAN ANTONIO RUN-OF- RIVER [WILSON] REUSE - KYLE/COUNTY LINE WSC DIRECT REUSE [HAYS] COUNTY-OTHER, HAYS, GUADALUPE (L ) GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] ,029 7,220 TWA REGIONAL CARRIZO AQUIFER CARRIZO-WILCOX ,169 4,685 4,388

41 DEVELOPMENT TWA TRINITY AQUIFER DEVELOPMENT VISTA RIDGE PROJECT CRYSTAL CLEAR WSC, GUADALUPE (L ) AQUIFER [GONZALES] TRINITY AQUIFER [COMAL] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [BURLESON] ,263 3,781 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 3,781 5,000 5,000 6,169 11,714 17,871 CRWA WELLS RANCH PROJECT PHASE II HAYS/CALDWELL PUA PROJECT MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) GOFORTH SUD, GUADALUPE (L ) GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) KYLE, GUADALUPE (L ) CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [GUADALUPE] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [CALDWELL] [HAYS] GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] [HAYS] HAYS/CALDWELL PUA PROJECT MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (SUBURBAN) CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [CALDWELL] [HAYS] 0 1,163 2,616 2,602 2,591 2, REUSE - KYLE/COUNTY LINE WSC DIRECT REUSE [HAYS] 2,329 3,591 4,318 4,284 4,172 4,063 MOUNTAIN CITY, GUADALUPE (L ) 2,329 4,754 6,934 6,939 7,029 7,141 DROUGHT MANAGEMENT - MOUNTAIN CITY EDWARDS / MIDDLE TRINITY ASR LOCAL TRINITY AQUIFER DEVELOPMENT MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) NIEDERWALD, GUADALUPE (L ) [HAYS] TRINITY AQUIFER ASR [HAYS] TRINITY AQUIFER [HAYS] [HAYS] DROUGHT MANAGEMENT - NIEDERWALD GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) PLUM CREEK WATER COMPANY, GUADALUPE (L ) [HAYS] GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] HAYS/CALDWELL PUA PROJECT LOCAL TRINITY AQUIFER DEVELOPMENT SAN MARCOS, GUADALUPE (L ) CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [CALDWELL] TRINITY AQUIFER [HAYS] Estimated Historical Water Use and 2017 State Water Plan Dataset: Plum Creek Conservation District September 20, 2017

42 GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) HAYS/CALDWELL PUA PROJECT MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (SUBURBAN) GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [CALDWELL] [HAYS] 0 0 2,379 3,470 4,580 5, ,964 4,575 7, ,122 1,684 2,506 3,587 REUSE - SAN MARCOS DIRECT REUSE [HAYS] 1,932 2,886 3,959 5,206 6,654 8,339 UHLAND, GUADALUPE (L ) 2,111 3,664 7,460 12,324 18,315 25,531 MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) WIMBERLEY, GUADALUPE (L ) [HAYS] GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (RURAL) TWA REGIONAL CARRIZO AQUIFER DEVELOPMENT TWA TRINITY AQUIFER DEVELOPMENT WIMBERLEY WSC, GUADALUPE (L ) GBRA - MBWSP - SURFACE WATER W/ ASR (OPTION 3C) TWA REGIONAL CARRIZO AQUIFER DEVELOPMENT TWA TRINITY AQUIFER DEVELOPMENT WOODCREEK, GUADALUPE (L ) GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] [HAYS] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [GONZALES] TRINITY AQUIFER [COMAL] GUADALUPE RUN-OF- RIVER [GONZALES] CARRIZO-WILCOX AQUIFER [GONZALES] TRINITY AQUIFER [COMAL] , , ,356 MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION (SUBURBAN) [HAYS] Sum of Projected Water Management Strategies (acre-feet) 14,073 28,579 40,651 51,238 69,741 88,522

43 APPENDIX B

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54 APPENDIX C